Another older essay on netspeak.

[matt_doyle]

There have always been places where dividing lines between social classes are drawn, and very often some of the most obvious markers of status and barriers between classes have dealt with language usage. In the past, however, these distinctions in language tended to be based largely on the economic status or the geographic location of the speaker, and hence on their education. In the growing online subculture, however, and gradually into offline society itself, a new low-prestige dialect has been developing that has seemingly little to do with economic factors. ‘Netspeak’ refers to the way the English language is used in online settings, and is characterized primarily by frequent mis-spellings, some deliberate and some due to typos; overuse of various initialisms and abbreviations peculiar to online environments; and disregard for particulars of grammar and of and of generally accepted online etiquette.

The initialisms and abbreviations common to Netspeak almost certainly originated as a time-saving device in the first internet chatrooms, where, in order to keep up with the conversations that were ongoing, one had to write very rapidly. Thus, saying ‘r’ for “are,” “u” for “you,” “2” for “to” or “too,” and similar practices began. With the advent of text messaging on cell phones, these habits have become more extreme, as long text messages cost more and can be difficult to read. Phrases that seem to have come in with text messaging include “kthxbai” for “okay, thanks, bye.”

The “bai” in the previous example is an example of another habit common in Netspeak: deliberate mis-spellings. I remain uncertain as t how and why this habit originated, but is perpetuated by example- so many people do it that it becomes nearly second nature for many. Another example of this sort of misspelling would be “kool” in place of “cool.” Most other typos can be accounted for simply because of typos: while current chat programs tend not to have quite as frantic of a pace; many people still type so quickly that they hit ‘enter’ without doing even rudimentary spellchecking, so “teh” for “the” and “liek” for “like” are hallmarks of the Netspeak dialect. Omission of vowels, whether purposeful or accidental, is also relatively common.

One more aspect of Netspeak that is used more selectively is l33tsp34k, or leet-speak. This specific slang involves the substitution of letters with numbers, symbols, or other letters (“ph” replacing “f,” for example) where users find it aesthetically pleasing, and was at one time prevalent among the masses of people who played online computer games. While usage has died off to some degree, it has also spread so that among many circles it is considered a mark of coolness to be able to “speak” l33t fluently. At the end of the paper, as a point of interest, an English-l33t alphabet conversion chart is provided, along with a few common phrases.

At this point, I would like to re-assert that Netspeak is, by and large, a low-prestige dialect. While commonly used, those who fall into it too deeply or too often have been labeled as “plebeians” by the more prescriptive grammarians in online communities. Plebeians are excluded from being invited to discussions or online communities, treated with condescension or even open scorn by the “elites”* , and very frequently, they are simply ignored. Due to the exclusionary nature of this seeming class divide, very few of the so-called plebeian are even aware that they have been singled out for ridicule or are looked down on in any way. In some online communities, the segregation is near to complete.

This is not to say that no Netspeak whatever is used by “elites.” Initialisms like “lol” for “laugh out loud,” and “brb” for “be right back” are definitely Netspeak, but their usage is universal. An “elite” will also sometimes use Netpeak with the intention of being ironic or mocking, in the same way that southern or cockney accents and dialects are occasionally affected with comic intent.

A plebeian is marked by use of Netspeak and bad grammar or spelling in almost all communication, with full sentences typed using Netspeak habits; i.e. “lol that is kool. u r gr8!!!1!!” While that may seem an extreme example, I have seen such language and worse used regularly by individuals who tend to be very coherent in offline life. This leads to an important point: while a large number of Netspeak users are young, so are large number of “elites.” Age and education do not restrict the use of Netspeak: a survey conducted of students at Stanford revealed that a small but still notable percentage of the surveyors used Netspeak, and a very few even indicated that it affected their academic writing. I have encountered many well-educated people in their late twenties and thirties whose usage of Netspeak would place them in the “plebeian” category as well.

These distinctions, of course, are almost all very subjective, and a matter of degree: in a survey of twenty-four people; there was a wide variety of opinion on what distinguished a plebe as such; ranging from usage of grammar to computer literacy to manners to intellectual attitudes (those who made this distinction presumed that plebes were easily impressed, excitable, and shallow; one source even described them as “teeny-boppers).”

There is, however, one shibboleth that generally proves reliable in separating the “plebeians” from the rest of online society. Use of the phrase “a/s/l?” to begin a conversation with a stranger is a tremendous social gaffe among the “elites” and highly uncommon in circles where Netspeak is not heavily used. While the other determinations are primarily matters of degree and subject to interpretation, this is a more serious infraction and quite clear as such to anyone cognizant of the etiquette used by “elites.” “A/S/L?” started as an abbreviation in messenger programs as a way to quickly acquaint yourself with who you were speaking with: their age, sex, and location. However, among the “elite” community, age is considered largely unimportant. The inquiry was also commonly used specifically when someone was looking for a partner in online flirtation or cybersex, and location is considered to be something only a stalker-type would instantly inquire about, so the “elite” community has rejected use of what used to be (circa 1995-6, at least) an almost universal introductory phrase online.

“Plebeians,” however, due either to the fact that they are new online, that they are in fact looking for targets for flirtatious behavior, or simply due to the social circles in which they travel, remain entirely unaware as a general rule that use of this phrase is taboo and will lead to social sanctions against them, even if they show some awareness that their other speech habits are undesirable and low prestige in some company.

Finally, it is very much in debate whether or not use of Netspeak is a problem that will have ramifications outside of e-mail circles. My tentative answer would be yes. While I disagree with the assertions and generalizations made by “elites” that plebes are all intellectually immature, shallow, or downright stupid, their use of language does seem to have some effect on both language usage in more formal circumstances and, possibly, on their general intellectual attitude. While the Stanford study did not show a significant impact on the quality of academic writing among Netspeak users, a recent report on Netspeak and literacy by the New York Times showed college students and even office workers using Netspeak grammar and spelling in formal e-mails, some of which were nearly incoherent. The potential for an America that is increasingly leery of reading losing its hold on the ability to compose lucid sentences is alarming.

I believe that Netspeak is likely to continue as it is, especially as cell-phone test messaging spreads, becoming a quick and acceptable shorthand that will nonetheless prove divisive in online culture- and maybe, as the line between the two blurs, in offline culture as well. My hope is that it will not become another issue merely to be complained of by the prescriptive grammarians while mainstream America seizes hold of the practice whole-heartedly. While I dislike and must ultimately reject the concept of reliably discernible intellectual classes based on use of Netspeak, I find the overabbreviation and vagueness of the English language offensive to both my aesthetic and rational sensibilities. It’s perfectly all right to let the language evolve, yes. I jst dn’t wnt 2 c us revert 2 a society w/out vwls, where evREthing is implied & clarity is 0wnz0r3d, k? thxbai.


* A term very few non-plebeians use; but it is the only word I was able to find to describe the group of prescriptive grammarians who habitually look down on plebeians that had any common usage whatsoever. These ‘elites’ are not to be confused with those Internet gamers who speak “l33t,” indeed, the two groups are almost mutually exclusive.



Now I have an idea simmering for an essay that would revisit this notion in the advent of Cat Macro as a dialect of its own. Anyone care to help me with the research?